The principles involved were carefully considered by the military delegates of all the States of Europe at the Brussels Conference of 1874, and their conclusions, which apply, I conceive, _mutatis mutandis_, to operations conducted by naval forces against places on land, are as follows:-- "ARTICLE 15 .-- Fortified places are alone liable to be besieged.

Towns, agglomerations of houses, or villages which are open or undefended cannot be attacked or bombarded." "ARTICLE 16 .-- But if a town, &c., be defended, the commander of the attacking forces should, before commencing a bombardment, and except in the case of surprise, do all in his power to warn the authorities." "ARTICLE 40 .-- As private property should be respected, the enemy will demand from parishes or the inhabitants only such payments and services as are connected with the necessities of war generally acknowledged, in proportion to the resources of the country." "ARTICLE 41 .-- The enemy in levying contributions, whether as equivalents for taxes or for payments which should be made in kind, or as fines, will proceed, as far as possible, according to the rules of the distribution and assessment of the taxes in force in the occupied territory.

Contributions can be imposed only on the order and on the responsibility of the general in chief." "ARTICLE 42 .-- Requisitions shall be made only by the authority of the commandant of the locality occupied." These conclusions are substantially followed in the chapter on the "Customs of War" contained in the _Manual of Military Law_ issued for the use of officers by the British War Office.
The bombardment of an unfortified town would, I conceive, be lawful--( 1) as a punishment for disloyal conduct; (2) in extreme cases, as retaliation for disloyal conduct elsewhere; (3) for the purpose of quelling armed resistance (not as a punishment for resistance when quelled); (4) in case of refusal of reasonable supplies requisitioned, or of a reasonable money contribution in lieu of supplies.

It would, I conceive, be unlawful--( 1) for the purpose of enforcing a fancy contribution or ransom, such as we were told was exacted from Liverpool; (2) by way of wanton injury to private property, such as was supposed to have been caused in the Clyde and at Folkestone, and _a fortiori_ such as would have resulted from the anticipated shelling during the night-time of the south coast of the Isle of Wight.
2.

Is it the case that international law is "all nonsense," and that "when we are at war with an enemy he will do his best to injure us: he will do so in what way he thinks proper, all treaties and all so-called international law notwithstanding"?
Are we, with Admiral Aube, to speak of "cette monstrueuse association de mots: les droits de la guerre"?
If so, _cadit quaestio_, and a vast amount of labour has been wasted during the last three centuries.